- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
without reading the linked blog post. The example he used is controversial enough, but it also looks like he is interested only in promoting his blog and corporate services. The post reads like a cut and paste message.
What do you all think?
I think it’s more than that, it’s definitely not a discussion type deal. I don’t see him as needing our services. I am okay if we don’t add him to the ward. “My goal here isn’t to prove that polygamy was sanctioned in the Book of Mormon but rather my goal is to show how different personalities react in different ways when exposed to new and somewhat controversial information….” Maybethat’s the truth. I think it’s a super-weird exercise. I lean towards adding everyone and dealing with problems if they arise. I think there’s some good that comes from everyone seeing that process in public. OTOH, you don’t want to exhaust moderators – especially since it wouldn’t fall to me to do this – with wild, drama-filled situations. Does he actually say that he’s LDS?
I’m good with not approving. I agree with Mom, I’m not sure he needs us, and I’m not sure what he has to offer. My main concern is admitting people who have an ulterior motive, especially when that motive appears to include profit of some kind. For example, bridget night is a single-issue commenter, but she generally has been okay – except for when she gets on her “leaving the LDS Church is a wonderful thing” soapbox and when she was trying to promote her book. We generally have given her a little rope on the first one, since it hasn’t appeared to be conversion-focused – but we always have quashed the book promotion. That’s the vibe I get from Coop’s post – that he is trying to promote a service and that he probably cut and pasted the same message on multiple sites (perhaps edited a bit for differing sites).
Ann, where did that quote come from? Quote:my goal is to show
Really stands out to me.
The justification for joining for Coop reads both as someone that could potentially give people good advice and as someone that’s looking for clients.
Edit:
I just saw the introduction he posted. Now I’m leaning more towards the conclusions already mentioned.
Sorry, I’m waaaay behind on catching up with recent posts.
If there are no objections, I will delete his introduction post later today. All opposed . . .
Quote:All opposed . . .
Busy playing Candy Crush. Delete away.
I see he attempted a second time – exact same post, lending itself to the idea that it is copied and pasted. Quote:I see he attempted a second time – exact same post, lending itself to the idea that it is copied and pasted.
Maybe he should consult the PR firm of Otterson & Co., they’ll have some spot on suggestions.
This was in Coop’s justification text with registration: “I work as a life/career coach and marriage counselor. Most of my clients are LDS so I have some insight into the issues typically faced by members.” I suspected he might be a problem, joining just to promote his services. But he could be a useful contributor. That’s up to him, I suppose. You guys are handling it already per our usual protocol.
I actually have been thinking about this, and I am going to reach out to him via email, tell him our concern and see what he says. I decided to respond via private message, to see if he still is checking in here and will see it. The following is the message I sent:
Quote:Coop,
The admins and moderators have been talking about your introduction post behind-the-scenes, which is why it has not been approved yet, and I need to ask you a very direct question:
What is you intention in asking to participate here?I ask, because we don’t allow participants to pitch anything that will make money for them – and a blog that leads them, explicitly or otherwise, to a service for they must pay crosses that line here. (I have been in sales and marketing for a long time, so I understand very well the subtleties of that arena.) We also are concerned that your post reads like a cut and paste message, and that hurts the chances of having it approved.
We are willing to approve your post and allow you to participate actively, IF you assure us that you will do so without mentioning or linking to that blog or mentioning your company name in any way (or appearing to look for ways to drum up business in more subtle ways). That would include editing your intro post and removing the link to your business from your signature line. Just to be clear, in cases like this where we begin with misgivings, we are more likely to act more quickly than normal in moderating comments or even banning participants. We are a tolerant group, but we try to enforce our basic rules (of which there aren’t many).
If you still are interested in participating, let me know – with an explanation of your intentions and commitment to follow our rules.
Ray
Good one Ray. Keep us posted. Any response from Coop? Nothing substantive. I think he was upset at my message.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.